Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Round-up of the latest numbers and charts from this excepti
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Round-up of the latest numbers and charts from this exceptional political period
Interesting analysis from @IpsosMORI on the source of UKIP voters by previous allegiance & age. 18% ex-CON 65+ pic.twitter.com/foOc1Jfk8T
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
If this is the case, then as bad as Labour campaigners feel today, the party has yet to hit rock bottom. Unfortunately, that could come on May 7th next year.
The one clear winner in Newark was David Cameron. Ukip’s putative surge was held back if not becalmed, Labour managed to fall 5% on their 2010 performance and the Lib Dem vote collapsed.
New questions will be asked about Ed Miliband’s leadership and some questions will start to be asked about Nigel Farage’s. But based on what both parties have been saying today about their respective results in Newark, don’t expect substantive answers any time soon.
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2014/06/06/weve-passed-peak-ukip-but-labour-has-yet-to-hit-rock-bottom/#more-18375
TSE: "So would I."
And there we have it: the modernisation project is complete. People like Sean Fear and myself were old Tory stalwarts until 4 years ago. I suspect that there might have been others too (Socrates? Sunil?) as well. We have been lost to UKIP, you may well be lost to the Liberal Democrats.
So who will be left?
We were all one solid team until very recently. But the lasting legacy of Cameron could be the near total destruction of the Conservative Party.
#LibDems' GB by-election %-ages since GE 2010 - 9 lost deposits from 16. Only 3 polls higher than 20% #Newark
http://t.co/qMjidIWWTG
UKIP push LDs in 4th on by-election aggregate after #Newark.
% of aggregate vote at GB by-elections since GE 2010 (update for #Newark): Lab 44%, Con 18%, UKIP 13%, LD 11%
http://t.co/svsOGLOnjQ
"isam said:
» show previous quotes
Im not saying they will win 4-5, i am saying thats the most they will win
These are their best shots IMO
Boston & Skegness
Bromsgrove
Castle Point
Dag & Rain
Dudley North
Great Grimsby
Halesown & Rowley Regis
Morley & Outwood
Newcastle Under Lyme
Plymouth Moor View
S Bas & E Thurrock
Staffordshire Moorlands
Stoke on Trent South
Telford
Thanet North
Thanet South
Thurrock
Walsall North Lads
Walsall South
West Bromwich West
Wolverhampton NE"
The Great Yarmouth seat not on your list, Mr. Sam? An oversight surely.
< Annecdote Alert >
I spoke to my bother last evening. He is not a natural Conservative voter being a retired London Underground train driver and, in his day, a fiery trade unionist. He now lives near Great Yarmouth. From what he told me, I should imagine that the UKIP message will go down very well indeed in that part of the world.
< /Annecdote Alert >
You've got some very strange bedfellows in UKIP, Clown Farage being amongst them.
Morley and Outwood? No, there will be a mix of UKIP leaning Tories and anti UKIP Tories there. Labour could improve their share of the vote.
ADDITION: there will be a Red Liberal red shift there I would think
Bar chart of all Great Britain by-election results since GE2010, updated for #Newark
http://t.co/CYFD8A4Zv3
Come on, Mr. Eagles. You're always saying physics gives you a hadron.
The key point is this: Cameron should have never lost those voters in the first place. A big portion of Conservative voters and members left the party simply because Cameron and his team either ignored, dismissed or were extremely rude to them. Perceptions matter enormously.
Whatever 'our' differences in policy, that was not necessary and by no means was it inevitable.
#Newark makes it three consecutive lost deposits at Westminster by-elections for the #LibDems
"The International Monetary Fund warns George Osborne that accelerating house prices and low productivity pose the greatest threat to the UK's economic recovery. "
Shalford on Surrey CC acts as a sort of test case as to who Conservatives would vote for, if offered a choice between UKIP and Lib Dem. It was a safe Conservative seat in 2009, but the Conservatives screwed up their nomination in 2013. On the face of it, it seems Conservative voters broke about 2:1 in favour of UKIP.
But, that's rural Surrey. Closer into London, they may have broken in favour of the Lib Dems. In Essex, or one of the old coalfields, they may have broken more heavily in favour of UKIP.
I think that problem is that it's increasingly hard to unite old school Conservatives, social and economic liberals, eurosceptics, working class social conservatives in one party of the right. PR would offer a solution to this.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-27732156
He was not arrested.
I've said to my MP and Assn that a deal of any description with UKIP and I walk. They believe 40% of the activist base in my assn would do likewise.
UKIP won't want a coalition or other deal because they would instantly lose lefty sorts, from whom they get a fair amount of support.
Cameron won't want any deal as it would lose him much of the centre and soft left (but who won't back Miliband).
It makes no sense for either side. There's a significant old school Conservative overlap, but the losses for both sides would exceed any potential gains.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/06/french-message-britain-get-out-european-union
It's important to note that Farage himself was (and is) a staunch Thatcherite. He once told me (in person, way back in 2002) that if you bit off the top of his head (like he was a stick of Blackpool rock) you would see the pattern TORY embedded right throughout the length of his body. He went on to say that (at the time) he was regularly approached by backbench MPs asking him to put himself forward to the candidates list; he'd be certain to get an excellent safe seat somewhere.
He refused. He just felt the Conservative party had abandoned its principles and its natural supporters. I got there about 20 years after him. Although I am in 'no man's land' and haven't joined UKIP.
I'd very careful about insulting him (or anyone in his party) as a 'Clown'. I read that as an insult at me (and my intelligence) as well. I'm sure you know the Conservatives still need 40%+ to reliably win majorities. You will not win a single ex-Conservative back with that approach.
It just reinforces divisions between us.
I'm unconvinced by this. Tactical voting implies deliberately voting for a party to stop another, rather than voting for the one you would vote for if it had a chance.
Now, there weren't any tactical voters in Newark in 2010. The 20% who voted LibDem were certainly not people voting LibDem because Labour didn't have a chance and the LibDems did. They were presumably, and very simply, people who preferred the LibDems to the alternatives. They might not have been particularly strongly identified with the LibDem Party, but neither were they voting tactically. They were just voting, period. They weren't Labour supporters voting LibDem to keep out the evil Tories.
Now, it may well be that quite a few of them yesterday voted Tory. But that if itself doesn't mean they were voting tactically to keep out UKIP. Surely the simplest explanation is that they've been disappointed with the LibDems, and preferred the Tories out of the options available, just as last time they preferred the LibDems out of the options available.
This is an important point, because, if I'm right, the number of LD->Con switchers won't depend on whether UKIP is seen as the main contender in a given seat. If the 'tactical voting' theory is right, it will.
Mr. Dave, bloody hard to say. Depends on political stance, how the EU goes and how it works out geographically.
Given there are lots of Lib-Con marginals and UKIP appears capable of inroads in the north I'd be more worried about UKIP being a third party if I were Labour than Conservative, but it's hard to say.
This, from the French!? Tu es kidding, monsieur?
Bias is quite often someone telling a truth that we don't like.
I am disgusted that the media show old soldiers remembering, and pomp and flags, but are more reticent about showing pictures of the dead and wounded (especially the cattle slaughter at "Utah" beach) where the Americans struggled bravely through withering fire.
I don't think Labour will have 'given up' on South Dorset. I would expect the local party to fight hard and attract activists from neighbouring seats given there are so few Labour targets in the area. But they would be stupid to devote any central resources to it.
It is 108 on their target list. If they won it they would have an 80+ majority. That seems very unlikely and in any event unnecessary. A sensible strategy is to focus on the 80 seats they need to win to get a working majority of 20 - 30. Given it is likely to be a close election it is pointless to waste resources on seats which are real longshots.
On Newark I think the result is a good one for the Conservatives. But like Eastleigh for the Lib Dems they put in a campaign effort which cannot be replicated across the country. And it would be good for Labour to do badly in an unwinnable seat - it means their vote will be more efficiently distributed.
I also don't get the relevance of Labour winning the seat in 1997. That was an election where Labour got a 170+ majority and still only took the seat by less than a thousand votes. Who seriously thinks Labour is going to win that sort of majority next year? And why is that the standard that needs to be matched? That is before we factor in the boundary change effects.
Colour me stunned.
Perhaps that is silly, but there does appear to be a little bit of evidence for that on here today. If that did happen, I think PR is almost a certainty. The Tories would never win on FPTP again after 2015. In pure PR, the votes in England might split 15-20% UKIP, 25-30% OB Tory, Labour 25%-30%, LibDem 5-10%, Green 5-10% etc.
It might make for some interesting coalition politics.
But all available polling, including that of the Conservative/Labour marginals, suggests that 2010 Lib Dems are generally breaking disproportionately for Labour in preference to the Conservatives. This pattern apparently did not take place in Newark. The inference is that some 2010 Lib Dem voters in Newark were voting Conservative as the least worst of the two front runners.
While I have been critical of Labour's performance in Newark, it is noteworthy that its 2010 voters seem to have been much less inclined than 2010 Lib Dem voters to vote tactically for either UKIP or the Conservatives.
However, I do think we are in a period of massive political change, the like of which has not been seen since the early 20th century when the Labour Party became a force. This is not surprising given the rapid changes our society has been through and is still going through. Changes greater and, more importantly, faster than we have seen since the urbanisation of the industrial revolution, if not ever.
Whether UKIP goes onto succeed as a parliamentary party or not, those who seek to deny real political change is happening and that the old models are still valid are doomed to disappointment. For example, the Lib Dems are not going to bounce back, those that think they will perhaps need to look at their own motivations and compare those with society at large. UKIP are now picking up roughly 1 in 4 of the voters those people cannot be ignored or buried by tactical voting.
The other point I would make is that, not surprisingly in this era of 24 hour news, people tend to look for fast results. You know the kind of thing, "UKIP didn't win a by election - they are off the rails and finished as an insurgent force". Real changes in politics happen much more slowly, decades not months.
Desperate anti UKIP meme pushing by parties that suffered appalling results
Economically dry, socially progressive. Speaking for myself, I see no conflict between, for instance, my Anglican values and the state allowing gays to get married.
Perhaps I should change my avatar to a picture of Macaulay: the unflinching principal underlying everything that the Tory Party does and should do is "Reform that you may preserve". If you resist all change, then all that you hold dear will be overthrown: far better to be a reed than an oak
Turn where we may - within, around - the voice of great events is proclaiming to us, "Reform, that you may preserve", [...] Pronounce in a manner worthy of the expectation with which this great debate has been anticipated, and of the long remembrance which it will leave behind. Renew the youth of the State. Save the multitude, endangered by its own ungovernable passions. Save the aristocracy, endangered by its own unpopular power. Save the greatest, and the fairest and most highly civilised community that ever existed from the calamities which may in a few days sweep away all the rich heritage of so many ages of wisdom and glory [...]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Babington_Macaulay,_1st_Baron_Macaulay
No voting system is perfect. With an increasingly fragmented UK polis, FPTP can start to give some absurdly disproportionate results.
http://politicalbookie.wordpress.com/2014/06/06/newark-a-bad-night-for-ukip/
Hypothetically, if there were 10 political parties, and 9 got 9.9% and the last one 11%, do you think they should have a majority of seats in the HoC?
PB has to remain a family site.
Great Grimsby, Great Yarmouth, Waveney, Castle Point, Thurrock, the Thanets, Eastleigh.
That's eight seats. If they won eight, that would be an incredible result for them. Personally, I still think that zero is the most likely seat tally next year.
Spanish 10 year bond yields now below the UK
I thought it was "Utah" where the "swimming" Shermans were dropped to far off shore and drifted uptide till they eventually sunk. But both American beaches were rougher for the troops than the others further up the coast.
TOPPING said:
Peter Allen on Radio5 in France this morning, was excellent, really from the heart. It sounded as uncomposed as I have heard him: "the boys...they were just boys...we should look at our own children and then think of them with rifles thrust into their hands...just boys..."
very moving.
Peter Allen is great.
One of the VETs on R4 this morning was pointing out that man of those boys in the graveyards of France were even younger than they are declared because they had lied about their age to sign up a year early, as he had done himself. Many would have been as young as my daughter. A really different world and a different generation.
I concede the point then.
You don't expect the BBC to take a warning from the IMF seriously? The trouble is only the right have been prepared to criticise Auntie in the past. Many on the left are often unhappy about he BBC's reporting but are reluctant to openly criticise it for fear of playing into Murdoch etc hands. Unless the left complain about BBC bias the myth that it's the red menace will continue. Critiquing our ludicrous housing policy is the least we might expect.
The only defence is to line the boxes with tinfoil.
The SDP polled over 50% in the early 80s; they had broken the mould; where are they now? Well, yes. Quite.
As antifrank says, the likeliest result is 0 seats. Given that UKIP is the Angry Party, Farage can't survive another failure like that and will be replaced.
I tremble with joy at the prospect of Neil Hamilton succeeding him.
With Cameron and Osborne I feel far more comfortable. I would still prefer the party had far more "ordinary" folk at the top and fewer public school boys but they are liberal in a very traditional sense. Can one really imagine the tories of the dark days introducing gay marriage?
I feel happier supporting the current Conservative party than I have in my entire life. I have major reservations about the EU but I would rather vote Labour than UKIP (as long as I was not living in Kirkcaldy of course).
Though these words are regularly attributed to Voltaire, they were first used by Evelyn Beatrice Hall, writing under the pseudonym of Stephen G Tallentyre in The Friends of Voltaire (1906), as a summation of Voltaire's beliefs on freedom of thought and expression.[12]
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Voltaire
(a) thinks that having open-borders is as puristically ideological as having firmly closed-borders, and would prefer a sensible middle-ground of an annual limit on net migration (to be debated and decided upon by parliament)
(b) thinks our political future is best served through a network of open global trading relationships, and a reinvigorated national democracy, and for both of these things to happen wants to withdraw from the political and economic union of the EU (but still maintain free and open trade with it, and continuing to positively engage with the continent, cooperating wherever possible in matters of mutual interest)
And (c) could you ever exist in the same party as someone like that?
1. The decline in the perceived riskiness of peripheral European economies in general, and Spain and Ireland in particular. Ireland, for example, should see government debt to GDP beginning to decline from 3Q or 4Q this year (albeit from a high level).
2. The introduction of (rather limited) QE by the ECB, which could well bolster asset prices across the whole Eurozone.
I also note that in last weeks' elections and yesterday the Tories seem to be out-performing the polls by about 2% with Labour is short by the same. Interesting.
No doubt (if Crosby/Shapps) have any sense, they're already over Thanet South like a rash, preparing the ground and canvassing like mad.
I doubt UKIP are doing anything similar.
Or, is the issue you have with open borders the fact that the EU now contains a lot of poorer countries, and that - for the first time - you are seeing competition for jobs from foreigners not just in highly skilled sectors (like finance, oil & gas, or pharmaceuticals), but at the lower end of the wage scale?
There's lots of people I like and admire in the Tory Party who believe in a) and b), but I don't think they'd ever run a poster that was as nasty as this
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/5/13/1399990131980/Ukip-poster-26-million-pe-006.jpg
She was stationed on the Isle of Wight where she became friendly with a girl called Mavis. When leave came my Mum had nowhere to go so went home with Mavis, met her brother who was on leave and they married in 1944, my eldest brother was born in May 1945.